Chair Johnson announced that the briefing on the draft Zoning Ordinance might have to be rescheduled due to the long agenda this evening.

WORKSESSION

Draft Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan – to identify issues of concern by chapter as well as those raised during the public hearings on the neighborhood plan. 

Ms. Wallas stated that this is the first of a series of worksessions on the Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan (TNP) and staff is asking the Commission to review the draft plan and the testimony and then decide what should be changed to direct staff to make the changes and then review a revised draft for action. 

Ms. Wallas stated that staff is proposing six worksessions to review the draft Plan, beginning this evening to review Chapter 1 – Introduction and Chapter 2 – Neighborhood Land Use. 

December 19, 2007 – Chapter 3 – Residential (Plus Chapter 8, page 80 and Historic Resources Appendices)

January 9, 2008 – Chapter 4 – Non-Residential (Plus Chapter 8, pages 82-84)

January 30, 2008 – Continue discussion on Chapter 4 – Non-Residential (Plus Chapter 8, pages 82-84)

February 13, 2008 – Chapter 5 – Transportation

March 12, 2008 – Chapter 6 – Environment, Chapter 7 – Community Facilities and Chapter 8 – Implementation

March 26, 2008 – Discussion and Instructions to staff on changes to the draft Plan.

Ms. Wallas noted that a public hearing would be scheduled for sometime in the spring of next year. 

Chair Johnson stated that he would prefer to continue on to Chapter 3, if the Commission moves through Chapters 1 and 2 in a short period of time, unless there is some reason not to do so.  Ms. Wallas explained that one of the reasons for the schedule is to line up the appropriate staff for each chapter to be discussed.  Staff, throughout the City, has been involved in the production of the draft Plan.  Staff was also involved with the writing of the chapters in the draft Plan and they all felt that this was important from the outset so that they had a buy-in from the staff as well as the community.  Staff had set up this schedule with a view to lining up staff members so they would be available at the appropriate meetings. 

Ms. Wallas noted that she anticipates that a number of commercial property owners would wish to be present during the discussion of Chapter 4 – Non-Residential.  That, again, was another reason to notify the citizens on what to expect at each worksession, as well as the appropriate staff and property owners.  Ms. Wallas said there could be an overview of Chapter 3 this evening, which could be helpful to staff regarding the Commission’s concerns on particular issues. 

Commissioner Tyner asked if the Chief of Planning would inform the Commission on what they have to deal with in the same timeframe, beginning with RORZOR in January.  Mr. Wasilak explained that he is anticipating the Commission’s consideration of the draft Zoning Ordinance (DZO) beginning on January 23, 2008.  He noted that the first meeting of the month would be dealing with the TNP and the second meeting of the month will be on the DZO.  There will be no items scheduled for January 23 other than the DZO.  Mr. Wasilak noted that he believes there may be further testimony on the DZO that may continue over to a proposed meeting on January 30, 2008.  Further discussion is needed pertaining to the January 30 meeting.  Mr. Wasilak discussed several land use items that staff needs to fit into the schedule over the next several months.  He said the primary focus of the Commission over the next few months is the DZO and the TNP, and staff will fit in development applications when they can do so.

In response to Chair Johnson, Mr. Wasilak said that he has no information on a seventh commission member as of yet.  He said he spoke to the City Clerk about the vacancy, and tonight’s meeting makes it even more important to have another commissioner on board in order to have a good working forum with the Commissioners. 

Commissioner Tyner commented on part of Chapter 1, which the Twinbrook Neighborhood Advisory Committee had spent a lot of time trying to decide what their catalyst should be and what direction should be taken.  Commissioner Tyner commented on the 1982 Twinbrook Plan.  He said the intent of that Plan was to establish concerns for neighborhood vitality and preservation, assess the impact of the rail transit and related changes on the community, and providing new detailed area plan, which reflects the interest of Twinbrook residents toward enhancing the area as a living environment.  He said that is the sort of thing that they all need to bear in mind as they go through, not only the draft Plan, but also, all the community comments.  The parameters are much the same, they have different names, Rockville Pike and Twinbrook Parkway, rather than the Metro rail, but those are issues that the Commission should be paying attention to there. 

Chair Johnson pointed out that the draft TNP is a comprehensive plan that reflects a vision for the neighborhood.  Obviously, they have received comments from people who do not think it reflects the correct vision and they have received comments from people who believe it does reflect the correct vision. Chair Johnson noted that he has reviewed every comment received, and he knows his fellow Commissioners have reviewed and considered them as well.  He commented that there is a yea and nay on everything regarding density, height, cut-through traffic, historic preservation, etc.  He said his own views about the TNP are well informed by all of the comments.  The Commission has to look at the Plan, the Comprehensive Master Plan, and the DZO in order for them to come up with revisions, which they believe are necessary in the Plan.  

Commissioner Tyner stated that Chapter 1 contains many statistics, which he believes should be updated.  The Advisory Group found that many people in the community really did not have any idea of what the community was and how the statistics fit into everything, so that is why they are in the Plan.  He mentioned that this might be the first of the neighborhood plans that could have an actual historic overlay.  The Commission had some very good comments about the Historic Preservation staff’s role in this process.  Twinbrook does have many historic places, as shown in the appendix.  The Commission may want to make that a chapter later on. 

Commissioner Wiener said that one thing she noticed while reading the comments, and with her experience of sitting on the Commission and working with the East Rockville Neighborhood Plan as well as North Stonestreet is that the language is a bit weak.  The language needs to be stronger and more precise so the readers and developers are clear about what the Commission wants in the Plan. 

Chair Johnson said that what citizens should remember is that the Plan would be setting the framework for 20 years, and what they might not want to see developed in a year or two, they might want to see in 15 to 20 years.  He said that the Plan would create the blue print to permit the kind of development that could be envisioned in the future for the Twinbrook community.  Chair Johnson noted that this Plan should give property owners a clear idea of what they could do with their properties over the next 20 years and through that process and as time passes and markets change, they will then know the kinds of development that the City is looking for from a planning prospective. 

Commissioner Ostell noted that for those who have not commented, the record is still open; therefore, it is not too late to submit their ideas to staff and the Commission.

Mr. Wasilak stated that Commissioner Hill submitted comments prior to the beginning of this meeting and each Commission has a copy of his notes. 

Ms. Wallas read some of Commissioner Hill’s notes.  Two comments referred to free or reduced lunches in the elementary schools and affordable housing.   

Ms. Wallas presented an overview of Chapter 1 (Introduction) in the draft Plan.  She said Chapter 1 does follow the format that staff uses in all of the neighborhood plans in laying out the general purpose and planning history and then moves into the demographic indicators.  She said staff has added in the regional context, which may not have been in neighborhood plans.  Staff felt that this is an area on the County/City line.  As Commissioner Tyner said, there is an abbreviated form of the Plan catalyst at the end of Chapter 1, which is an organizing tool. 

Ms. Wallas referred to Page three of Commissioner’s Hill comments regarding Chapter 1, Introduction regarding Affordable Housing and whether it should be expressed more clearly in the Vision Statement in the Plan.   

Chair Johnson stated that his view is that affordable housing needs to be in the Plan as a specific goal and how it could be accomplished.  He said he does not know if it needs to be in the Vision Statement.  Ms. Wallas stated that she would appreciate some guidance from the Commission of how affordable housing could be achieved at the neighborhood plan level.  In the Plan, there is a list of issues that staff felt could not be addressed at the neighborhood level and that is at the back of Chapter 8.  Affordable Housing is one of the issues on the list. 

Commissioner Wiener questioned how the “Legacy at Lincoln Park” project was progressing because it would be an interesting way of looking at affordable housing.  Mr. Wasilak replied that he was informed that the project was selling very well.  Commissioner Wiener noted that the project is a different way of creating affordable housing and still having a wonderful place to live.  She said that this type of project would be good to bring in with mixed uses as live/work units.  Mr. Wasilak commented that staff and the Commission could look at options for achieving some units within the neighborhood plan in addition to a policy objective. 

Commissioner Tyner said that there is some HOC housing in the neighborhood.  It is not the same as affordable housing, but that program is alive and doing well in the neighborhood. 

Commissioner Wiener said affordable housing gives people the chance to own, which is why the housing project in Lincoln Park is such an interesting program and has probably given people the first chance they have ever had to own their own homes and pride comes with that opportunity. 

The Commission and staff discussed redevelopment of the commercial area in Twinbrook that would provide enough housing stock so that there is affordable housing in the community such as Moderately Priced Dwelling Units (MPDUs), Burgundy Shopping Center as an ideal place to have second floor affordable-type housing, reworking Chapter 13 regarding housing, refurbishing older housing stock in the City as affordable homes, researching resources available to citizens of the City that could be part of the housing chapter or as an appendix, specifying owner occupied affordable housing rather than rentals in the chapter, specifying certain types of housing the neighborhood would want to have, and educating citizens on the programs that would assist them in renovating their homes.   

Ms. Wallas further discussed recommendations for additional community facilities.  One of the issues in the area is a lack of space for school programming.  The Plan has some ideas on that subject.  The other issue is Optional Method of Development; the Plan does not get into discussions of Optional Method of Development and she understands that RORZOR has not addressed Optional Method of Development.  Chair Johnson questioned that if the City allows certain kinds of development, what would they get out of it.  One of the things that speaks loudly is the need for more open space.   There are only two ways to provide open space, eminent domain or developer-provided.  However, how do they get the developers to provide it in the Plan?  The Zoning Ordinance has minimum open space requirements for development, but the Zoning Ordinance does not say, “If you build a six-story condominium in the City that means you have to provide five acres of public open space”. The Commission needs to think of another way without calling it an Optional Method.  Chair Johnson asked staff if there could be a goal in the existing Twinbrook commercial area requiring two acres of public open space.  He asked what effect that would have on the market and development.  Ms. Block explained the process.  Mr. Wasilak stated that if that is a stated goal in the Plan, then it would have to be followed through as an objective, as a policy, and then ultimately some recommendation for regulation, whether it is zoning or some other city regulation so that it becomes something achievable.  Chair Johnson stated that that is the reason the Commission did not want to hold off on the Plan until RORZOR was done because they want to set the vision for the Plan and then have the zoning and regulations do what the Plan wants rather than wait.  Mr. Wasilak replied that he would not consider the Commission limited by the RORZOR draft that has been released.  If there is something the Commission feels appropriate for Twinbrook that is not part of the RORZOR draft, and there is a modification they feel should be made to achieve it in Twinbrook, that is within the Commission’s purview.  Because the Plan is following so closely along with the draft Zoning Ordinance, they would have an opportunity to translate over to the RORZOR draft as well.  The normal course of events would be that it would come out of the Master Plan, be adopted and then become part of a text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. 

Commissioner Ostell said that they could establish for any parcel that is going to redevelop that they want to see a certain percentage of open space.   The Commission could do that without an Optional Method.  The other thing in terms of open space that is possible is to rezone that from residential to park zone, so that if the schools become abandoned at some point in time, there will not be an R-60 development going in on that acreage, there will be a park zone. 

The Commission further discussed rezoning of schools, churches, and other large areas for open space, pocket parks, Catalyst 2 identifying places that could be available for pocket parks and tot lots, how much housing stock does the City needs for the next 20 years, and how much of that makes sense in the Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan, residents in Twinbrook feel very overcrowded, that more affordable housing is needed in Twinbrook to give people impetus to use public transportation to work, provide more transit in the community, people want to work where they live, where housing is going to go due to the density in Twinbrook, putting in specific number of dwelling units per acre in the Plan, the appropriate height for shopping centers on Veirs Mill Road, mixed-use development being somewhat controversial with residents, and the census of  Twinbrook neighborhood.

Ms. Wallas presented an overview of Chapter 2 (Neighborhood Land Use) of the draft Plan.  She stated that Chapter 2 is a statement of what exists in the neighborhood.  Ms. Wallas said she also wanted to explain Page 20 of the Chapter regarding how changes came about and what mechanisms were involved. 

Commissioner Tyner stated that he believes that the redevelopment paragraph on Pages 23 and 24 needs to be adjusted, especially because RORZOR unofficially removed the loading zone concept.  Ms. Wallas stated that it would address the concern about it not developing for ten years. 

The Commission discussed concerns regarding floating zone; the rezoning of properties, some of which would be nonconforming might limit the property owners’ ability to raise capital for expansion, and not a great deal of incentive for property owners to do anything else to their properties.  They also discussed spot zoning issues, overlay zones, zoning mechanisms that shape development, making the Plan more specific on zoning, and grandfathering concerns. 

In response to Commissioner Ostell, Chair Johnson stated that after going through all the worksessions, staff could present the Commission with suggested revisions based on the Commission’s feedback. 

Mr. Wasilak stated that one thing that would be useful would be that the Commissioners give staff direction to make those revisions based on the Commission’s consensus. 

In response to Commissioner Tyner, Ms. Wallas said that staff would get back to the Commission for clarification of Chapters 1 and 2, if it were needed. 

The Commission and staff discussed the revision process of each chapter in the draft Plan.

Ms. Wallas stated that Chapter 3 would be the subject of the December 19 worksession.  She explained that historic preservation staff would be present at the worksession.  

COMMISSION ITEMS

Chief of Planning Report

Mr. Wasilak reported that the next Commission meeting is scheduled for December 19, 2007 and will focus on the Twinbrook Neighborhood Plan as well as continuing the briefing of Zoning Ordinance articles.  There will also be one Final Record Plat on the agenda. 

Mr. Wasilak stated that the agenda for the meeting of January 9, 2008 would include some land use items as well as a briefing on the draft Zoning Ordinance.  A public hearing is anticipated on January 23, 2008, which will be devoted to the draft Zoning Ordinance.  The public hearing might have to be continued to a date after January 23, depending on how many people want to address the Commission. 

Mr. Wasilak stated that there are three meetings scheduled in January. 

Mr. Wasilak stated that for the next meeting, he would produce a memorandum that sets forth all of the various items coming forward for upcoming meetings.  He said he would try to even out the schedule better to have an idea of what the Commission and staff would be dealing with over the next three months or so. 

Chair Johnson stated that he would not be at the December 19 meeting, but he would submit his comments to staff regarding Chapter 3 of the TNP. 

Mr. Wasilak stated that the Commission would be electing the Chair for 2008 at the December 19, 2007 meeting. 

FYI Information

Mr. Wasilak reported that the Rockville Pike Kickoff Meeting was last Tuesday and it was thought to be very successful.  There were over 130 registered participants.  He encouraged everyone to stay involved in the process and email correspondence would be going out to anyone who is registered in the interim for the next public milestone, which will be a stakeholder’s workshop with the consultants in February.  Information would be sent to the Commission, once the date has been scheduled.

ADJOURN

After further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 9:19 p.m.